It’s not censorship for the voting public to decide what books will be purchased with taxpayer dollars. That’s a complete inversion of the reality.
Otherwise you're not arguing in favor of democracy, you're arguing in favor of your own personal moralizing.
But just think this through.
Imagine how terribly ideological available book selections would become if we had to have “the voting public” decide which books were available. I have a feeling that you would not be happy with the books that the voting majority decides are “acceptable”.
And you act like it’s just the money of the people that don’t want the books that is being used. What about the money of the people that want the books available? Should it be up to you to say the library can’t use those people’s money to buy those books?
Quit acting like this is about the money spent when it is purely about you wanting to foist your morals onto others and using the cost as a scapegoat.
And lastly, it is not, and should not ever be the case that everyone has to agree on every dollar that the government spends. Money is spent on good programs that you as an individual will never directly benefit from. Does that mean that we should allow voters to decide how every dollar is spent? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. So long social security and Medicare and the majority don’t currently use them.
Wait, but both of those are censorship of a form; Apple is just allowed to censor whatever it wants.
Taken to the extreme, should a library be allowed to stock only books that promote the political party of whoever won the latest election?
Obviously decisions for shelf space have to be made. If those decisions for shelf space are made solely by the government's dislike of the material, though, that feels pretty obviously like government censorship to me.
It's crazy how transactional some fundamental American values have become lately.